Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
India on The Moon
Comments
-
Surely if this is true than our funds are being used well? Teach a man to teach and all of that.Jints said:
Except that they didn't send any people to the moon, the project cost $75m and will generate 100s of times that in inward investment, income from space alunches and good PR which will help eradicate poverty much quicker and to a much greater extent than spending $75m directly on it.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Right, but I think the point people are trying to make is that perhaps India would require less aid if they focused more on eradicating poverty, rather than sending people to the moon. But I think you already knew that.SELR_addicks said:
I would hazard a guess that £0 of our money goes to the India Space Project. Hope that helps.The_Organiser said:As above, I think people are only forming an opinion on how India spend their money, because it has historically included our donations. If it had not, I suspect most people would not give a flying…
In other words, it’s more a grumble about our historical and current aid policy.0 -
I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.0
-
Well that's the thread locked!2
-
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.1 -
Sooner rather than later please...Friend Or Defoe said:Well that's the thread locked!0 -
🤣 like clockwork1
-
That just about sums up your thought process for most things...seth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.8 -
He can't help it.SporadicAddick said:
That just about sums up your thought process for most things...seth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
It's how his brain us programmed1 -
Sponsored links:
-
PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
0 -
Why have you highlighted that text and added a laughing emoji? The advantages were great for India, but being objective, there were disadvantages tooSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times. 1 -
Because it fits the self hating, self flagellating myopic narrative that certain parts of society and certain posters on here wish to propagate about Great Britain and our history. Everything is through a certain lens.PrincessFiona said:
Why have you highlighted and a laughing emoji? The advantages were great for India, but being objective, there were disadvantages tooSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
I might call it woke, but then I'll be told that I'm in favour of racism...2 -
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1947534300?linkCode=gs2&tag=slate01-21PrincessFiona said:
Why have you highlighted that text and added a laughing emoji? The advantages were great for India, but being objective, there were disadvantages tooSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
Try reading the Indian perspective than the rose-tinted UK view. (he's also born in the UK so can't really claim he's 'biased')
Imperial nostalgia is a real thing and there is a large section of society that genuinely thinks we 'helped' those countries while ruling and pillaging them. It is a false narrative designed to help us feel better about our past.1 -
But why not be fair and objective and see all sides? People who have an agenda and only see/comment on one side just don't come across as credible, thereby lessening their opinion/argument. (Like seeing racism where there is none, or at least no evidence of any, just demeans, even undermines the actual important anti-racism message and cause)SporadicAddick said:
Because it fits the self hating, self flagellating myopic narrative that certain parts of society and certain posters on here wish to propagate about Great Britain and our history. Everything is through a certain lens.PrincessFiona said:
Why have you highlighted and a laughing emoji? The advantages were great for India, but being objective, there were disadvantages tooSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
I might call it woke, but then I'll be told that I'm in favour of racism...
Of course there were advantages for India, but it would not be objective not to mention the disadvantages too0 -
PrincessFiona said:
But why not be fair and objective and see all sides? People who have an agenda and only see/comment on one side just don't come across as credible, thereby lessening their opinion/argument. (Like seeing racism where there is none, or at least no evidence of any, just demeans, even undermines the actual important anti-racism message and cause)SporadicAddick said:
Because it fits the self hating, self flagellating myopic narrative that certain parts of society and certain posters on here wish to propagate about Great Britain and our history. Everything is through a certain lens.PrincessFiona said:
Why have you highlighted and a laughing emoji? The advantages were great for India, but being objective, there were disadvantages tooSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
I might call it woke, but then I'll be told that I'm in favour of racism...
Of course there were advantages for India, but it would not be objective not to mention the disadvantages too
I'm laughing because the negatives far outweigh the 'positives', but you're trying to equate them into some weird 50/50 give and take.
0 -
Where did I mention any proportion between the 2? You seem to be assuming or making it upSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
But why not be fair and objective and see all sides? People who have an agenda and only see/comment on one side just don't come across as credible, thereby lessening their opinion/argument. (Like seeing racism where there is none, or at least no evidence of any, just demeans, even undermines the actual important anti-racism message and cause)SporadicAddick said:
Because it fits the self hating, self flagellating myopic narrative that certain parts of society and certain posters on here wish to propagate about Great Britain and our history. Everything is through a certain lens.PrincessFiona said:
Why have you highlighted and a laughing emoji? The advantages were great for India, but being objective, there were disadvantages tooSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
I might call it woke, but then I'll be told that I'm in favour of racism...
Of course there were advantages for India, but it would not be objective not to mention the disadvantages too
I'm laughing because the negatives far outweigh the 'positives', but you're trying to equate them into some weird 50/50 give and take.0 -
Then why don't you say on the whole as a balance of proportion. The British Empire was a negative experience for Indians and other nations + cultures worldwide?PrincessFiona said:
Where did I mention any proportion between the 2? You seem to be assuming or making it upSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
But why not be fair and objective and see all sides? People who have an agenda and only see/comment on one side just don't come across as credible, thereby lessening their opinion/argument. (Like seeing racism where there is none, or at least no evidence of any, just demeans, even undermines the actual important anti-racism message and cause)SporadicAddick said:
Because it fits the self hating, self flagellating myopic narrative that certain parts of society and certain posters on here wish to propagate about Great Britain and our history. Everything is through a certain lens.PrincessFiona said:
Why have you highlighted and a laughing emoji? The advantages were great for India, but being objective, there were disadvantages tooSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
I might call it woke, but then I'll be told that I'm in favour of racism...
Of course there were advantages for India, but it would not be objective not to mention the disadvantages too
I'm laughing because the negatives far outweigh the 'positives', but you're trying to equate them into some weird 50/50 give and take.
I asssumed because above you were defending colonial Britain above.0 -
Because it is not a thread about a deep dive into the colonisation of IndiaSELR_addicks said:
Then why don't you say on the whole as a balance of proportion. The British Empire was a negative experience for Indians and other nations + cultures worldwide?PrincessFiona said:
Where did I mention any proportion between the 2? You seem to be assuming or making it upSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
But why not be fair and objective and see all sides? People who have an agenda and only see/comment on one side just don't come across as credible, thereby lessening their opinion/argument. (Like seeing racism where there is none, or at least no evidence of any, just demeans, even undermines the actual important anti-racism message and cause)SporadicAddick said:
Because it fits the self hating, self flagellating myopic narrative that certain parts of society and certain posters on here wish to propagate about Great Britain and our history. Everything is through a certain lens.PrincessFiona said:
Why have you highlighted and a laughing emoji? The advantages were great for India, but being objective, there were disadvantages tooSELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
I might call it woke, but then I'll be told that I'm in favour of racism...
Of course there were advantages for India, but it would not be objective not to mention the disadvantages too
I'm laughing because the negatives far outweigh the 'positives', but you're trying to equate them into some weird 50/50 give and take.
Why should I apportion what percentage was an advantage and what a disadvantage? Why should you make a completely incorrect assumption on what I wrote? Just demonstrates your bias2 -
Nice deflection.
Anyway, good on India for making to make it to the moon.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
Not a deflection but sound logic. Do you often make incorrect assumptions about what others say?SELR_addicks said:Nice deflection.
Anyway, good on India for making to make it to the moon.1 -
-
It did bring advantages. The railways, cars, buildngs etc etc , and in my experience out there the average person loves us. To be honest bit too much as i found it embarrassing women getting up for me to offer me their seat in 2nd class on a train.SELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
But i must admit even though its wrong it did make me laugh when i asked the guide what all the holes were inside the Taj Mahal and he said "that's where all the rubys and emeralds were before your soldiers stole them".
If you want to see some real live Empire visit Kodi Canal or Shimla or another hill station - theyre like Devon in India. Cottages Gymkhana and cream teas to this day.1 -
2 Points:Greenhithe said:
It did bring advantages. The railways, cars, buildngs etc etc , and in my experience out there the average person loves us. To be honest bit too much as i found it embarrassing women getting up for me to offer me their seat in 2nd class on a train.SELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
But i must admit even though its wrong it did make me laugh when i asked the guide what all the holes were inside the Taj Mahal and he said "that's where all the rubys and emeralds were before your soldiers stole them".
If you want to see some real live Empire visit Kodi Canal or Shimla or another hill station - theyre like Devon in India. Cottages Gymkhana and cream teas to this day.
1. The advantages that it may have provided (I didn't claim there weren't) were heavily outweighed by the negatives of British rule.
2. Other countries have been able to build railways, cars and other buildings without needing to be ruled by a western nation.
It isn't the case that India couldn't have done it without our help. In actual fact India was a lot richer and had a higher GDP before British rule, than afterwards.
But it's off topic so I'm just responding to your post.0 -
So back to the moon.... I understand the lander has a built in seisometer, to investigate and monitor potential moonquakes?
(This post was carefully vetted, so as to ensure it cannot be hijacked by resident CL blow hards)0 -
SELR_addicks said:
2 Points:Greenhithe said:
It did bring advantages. The railways, cars, buildngs etc etc , and in my experience out there the average person loves us. To be honest bit too much as i found it embarrassing women getting up for me to offer me their seat in 2nd class on a train.SELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
But i must admit even though its wrong it did make me laugh when i asked the guide what all the holes were inside the Taj Mahal and he said "that's where all the rubys and emeralds were before your soldiers stole them".
If you want to see some real live Empire visit Kodi Canal or Shimla or another hill station - theyre like Devon in India. Cottages Gymkhana and cream teas to this day.
1. The advantages that it may have provided (I didn't claim there weren't) were heavily outweighed by the negatives of British rule.
2. Other countries have been able to build railways, cars and other buildings without needing to be ruled by a western nation.
It isn't the case that India couldn't have done it without our help. In actual fact India was a lot richer and had a higher GDP before British rule, than afterwards.
But it's off topic so I'm just responding to your post.
Having looked into it a little (I am not an expert in Indian history, notably the period of and the impact of the BE but I have read and studied A Passage to India which is a very interesting read), there are many debates (by expert historians) about the balance between the advantages and the disadvantages. And unsurprisingly, they are not in agreement and certainly many not saying one 'heavily outweighed the other. But I haven't see any of them misrepresent what another has said or concluded by merely pointed out there were 2 sides to the argument!1 -
How would you know?SporadicAddick said:
That just about sums up your thought process for most things...seth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
If you want to have another dig at me couldn’t you be a bit more creative?1 -
A passage to India is a source of information I suppose, but maybe there are other perspectives.PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
My assumption is that ‘advantages’ were all for the colonialists,
Maybe the people there were not entirely persuaded that the British were beneficial.
Does ‘A Passage to India’ cover the so called ‘Indian Mutiny’?
Mutiny no less, how very dare they.
1 -
So you've read one book and decided there's a balance of advantages and disadvantages. I'd suggest you read a bit more and, in particular, look at some Indian viewpoints of the Empire.PrincessFiona said:SELR_addicks said:
2 Points:Greenhithe said:
It did bring advantages. The railways, cars, buildngs etc etc , and in my experience out there the average person loves us. To be honest bit too much as i found it embarrassing women getting up for me to offer me their seat in 2nd class on a train.SELR_addicks said:PrincessFiona said:
Have you read a Passage to India? It looks at the country from all sides, including criticism of the Empire but also the advantages it broughtseth plum said:I sort of thought aid to India was some kind of compensation for squeezing the juice out of the place during colonial times.
But i must admit even though its wrong it did make me laugh when i asked the guide what all the holes were inside the Taj Mahal and he said "that's where all the rubys and emeralds were before your soldiers stole them".
If you want to see some real live Empire visit Kodi Canal or Shimla or another hill station - theyre like Devon in India. Cottages Gymkhana and cream teas to this day.
1. The advantages that it may have provided (I didn't claim there weren't) were heavily outweighed by the negatives of British rule.
2. Other countries have been able to build railways, cars and other buildings without needing to be ruled by a western nation.
It isn't the case that India couldn't have done it without our help. In actual fact India was a lot richer and had a higher GDP before British rule, than afterwards.
But it's off topic so I'm just responding to your post.
Having looked into it a little (I am not an expert in Indian history, notably the period of and the impact of the BE but I have read and studied A Passage to India which is a very interesting read), there are many debates (by expert historians) about the balance between the advantages and the disadvantages. And unsurprisingly, they are not in agreement and certainly many not saying one 'heavily outweighed the other. But I haven't see any of them misrepresent what another has said or concluded by merely pointed out there were 2 sides to the argument!
I've already linked a book above that could help.
The historical viewpoint tends to be the British Empire weren't the worst Empire in the context of the World at the time (see France, the Dutch or other Nations for that), but you would struggle to find a single credible historian arguing that the British Empire was a good thing for India on the whole.2 -
That's very discriminatory - surely it should be orbitalplanetarysatellitequakes.soapy_jones said:So back to the moon.... I understand the lander has a built in seisometer, to investigate and monitor potential moonquakes?
(This post was carefully vetted, so as to ensure it cannot be hijacked by resident CL blow hards)
0
